Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 614 posts

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#551

Post by imtringued »

dlisboa wrote: post #307
pao wrote: post #288

Seems like a lot of the interest in these bans is coming from new research like this [Stanford study]( https://news.stanford.edu/2022/01/27/rethinking-cooking-gas/ ) showing gas stoves emit more methane than previously thought. They say all residential stoves in the US emit GHG equivalent to 500,000 cars. There are 276 million cars in the US. So, this problem is about 1/500 of the car problem. If you eliminated all s…

This relates to a difficult topic, which is: should modern civilization be 100% carbon neutral? Some things are inherently difficult to make electric, yet we need them to have what we'd call a "modern civilization". Planes are the biggest one: there is a drive to use more trains instead of planes, but should we give that up? It is definitely a step backwards in civilization, as large parts of the world are now imposs…

I am convinced that fundamental changes are required in the economy for us to solve climate change. I recently watched a video about carbon offsets by growing trees and it is basically fraud.

You know, using terra preta for soil improvement would generate basically infinite demand bio char which can then be sequestered into the soil.

If you wanted to get carbon out of the atmosphere this would not only sequester carbon, it would also improve the soil and reduce the need for synthetics in conventional farming.

There is no way this will happen. If we had the right economic system we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#552

Post by tomcam »

syntheweave wrote: post #505
83afnpg wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They might be 80% efficient, but I think around 40% of California electricity comes from natural gas. It’s kind of silly to convert from gas to electricity to heat in terms of efficiency.

I checked this recently. California is still in the 30-40% range for gas/fossil fuels usage on average, but it has achieved a 100% renewables grid for a 15 minute period this year, and it wasn't a fluke or engineered stunt, but one more in a series of record-breaking milestones which have seen the grid periodically blast through the 90% range. So the trend looks good for electric conversion.

Why are they preparing for widespread brownouts this summer? https://www.eenews.net/articles/grid-monitor-warns-of-u-s-bl...

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#553

Post by danhor »

kmtrowbr wrote: post #412
jklinger410 wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not focus on improving how we generate electricity before we tear out all the gas? It's incredibly simple. We can, at will, change how the "single" source of energy is generated. There is no time that is too early to have all energy consolidated to one source. Not only because the plants that generate the electricity are more efficient and cleaner than everyone burning their own fuel (even when they are gas or…

The internet has successfully changed my mind! A very rare event. No need to appeal to bad faith. I simply received an engineering education which taught me that a great deal of energy is lost along the way to delivering electricity to houses, so that, for the purposes of generating heat, it's usually best to simply generate the heat via the primary route. I also grew up in the Northern Midwest & had to pay electric…

For heating the promise of heat pumps is even greater, with "efficiency" of over 300% (possible since the heat energy is transferred from outside). This means it's even more efficient to just burn gas for electricity and use a heat pump for heating.

There are currently quite a few limitations for heat pumps, especially for retrofitting, but for new homes the main argument is initial investment price. A heat pump is initially usually much more expensive than the alternatives (although cheaper over time).

I'm not aware of any health arguments in regards to gas vs. heat pumps.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#554

Post by martincollignon »

buro9 wrote: post #105
martincollignon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why we created Lun. Every gas boiler's consumption emits about 2tCO2 per year - and there are about 90 million buildings in Europe that could be heated using heat pumps instead, with huge benefits for energy efficiency and carbon emissions. As you said, it's a hard problem. Luckily, politicians and bureaucrats are passing more and more legislation that will force the fossil fuels out of heating over the next…

For where I live in London, ground heat pumps are infeasible and air heat pumps would produce too much noise and not be permitted under conservation area rules. What most of the UK needs is an effective drop-in replacement to a combi boiler, ideally one that doesn't need a large water storage cylinder. It could even be a combination of a slow boiler (for radiators) and a fast water heating unit (for bath/shower/taps)…

For dense, urban environment I think district heating should we the way to go. Works very well in Denmark!

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#555

Post by danhor »

ars wrote: post #20
GaelFG wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"So using electricity instead of natural gas in your home is wasteful." I (genuinely) wonder if what's true. I remember thinking the same things about electric car "how can burning fuel in a factory, storing it, send it thought line for kilometers and then store them in a car batteries and then feed the motor be more efficient than burning fuel directly in the motor" and was proven false. Assuming we aldready have th…

An electric motor is more efficient mostly because of regenerative braking. Not having an engine with variable RPM helps. They should make a car that's basically a generator charging a medium sized battery, and everything else is electric. (Don't directly power the wheels from the engine, that makes things too complicated.) Kind of like a diesel-electric train, but with a battery to capture energy from regenerative b…

No, the regenerative breaking isn't the reason why electric vehicles are more efficient. Traditional ICE are very inefficient, only converting 20% of chemical energy to kinetic energy (with the rest being turned to heat). Diesels are a better at 40%. (modern ccs gas power plants get to 65% from gas to electricity)

Electric motors in cars are approx. 90% efficient. Combined with charging losses and others, that comes out to approx. 70%-80%.

Regenarative breaking only adds an additional ~20%.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#556

Post by marvin »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #538
marvin wrote: post #460

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Negative externalities would ideally just be handled through proportional taxation. Then market incentives work it out. Taxes are used to clean up the externalities.

That's the standard neoliberal solution that never works vs California's experience that phase outs and bans work well.

It currently costs $600 to permanently remove one ton of CO2 from the atmosphere. How many percent of the United States' CO2 emissions are subjected to this level of CO2 tax, along with similar import taxes to avoid shifting emissions to locales with no tax?

This will work.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#558

Post by pirate787 »

derriz wrote: post #461
tompccs wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you have written is wrong. Gas is very efficient. If you have the choice of burning gas at a power station (which is how a lot of electricity is generated now a days) and piping it directly into people's homes for the end goal of generating heat, piping wins every time. The inefficiencies of converting gas to electricity and transporting that electricity are significant and well known. Additionally, I don'…

Burning gas on a stove to heat food is about 40% efficient. Induction is about 85% efficient. Modern CCGT is about 60% efficient. So converting the energy contained in natural gas into electricity in a large CCGT plant and then cooking with the electricity is more efficient than piping the gas to a home and burning it there. More importantly for me is that, you don't pollute your breathing air with the byproducts of…

My friend is just 36 and a chef. She has stage 4 lung cancer. I wonder how much her workplace particulate matter exposure played a role.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#559

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

powersnail wrote: post #515
wbsss4412 wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> God forbid I spill something in the middle of cooking on induction. Suddenly I have to try to cleanup a hot glass and manage the whole mess. I think you’re overestimating how hot induction stoves get, the element itself doesn’t heat up at all. When you have a significant spill on a gas stove, it can put the flame out partially or entirely, which is much more of a challenge than wiping off an induction element.

> the element itself doesn’t heat up at all. That doesn't sound like possible to me (I've never used those stove, so I've no knowledge). Although induction only heats the pan, wouldn't the pan simply heat up the stove by contact?

They do heat up but not enough to make it impossible to wipe them clean. I hate resistive tops for cooking with a passion. I loved by gas range but induction is fine. It heats up quickly. It can stay consistently low. It goes smoothly from the two in short amount of time. But I’m an European so I don’t suffer from the American cast iron pan fad and just use normal cook wear.

Re: What a gas stove ban means for restaurants

#560

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

tompccs wrote: post #411
occz wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that this is relevant at all in the context of this discussion - electric cooking methods - particularly induction - are superior to gas in essentially every way, shape or form - barring the production of wok hei, which is why the article stresses that so much, while conveniently leaving out all the massive downsides of gas stoves. Gas stoves are also generally used by gas companies to get gas lines dra…

Everything you have written is wrong. Gas is very efficient. If you have the choice of burning gas at a power station (which is how a lot of electricity is generated now a days) and piping it directly into people's homes for the end goal of generating heat, piping wins every time. The inefficiencies of converting gas to electricity and transporting that electricity are significant and well known. Additionally, I don'…

> If you have the choice of burning gas at a power station (which is how a lot of electricity is generated now a days) and piping it directly into people's homes for the end goal of generating heat, piping wins every time.

That’s factually wrong.

> I will grant that a very good electric (ie, induction)

This sentence doesn’t make sense. Resistive and induction cooktops have nothing in common. One is not a good version of the other. It’s a completely different experience. The fact that you don’t seem aware of this seriously hinders your comment.

Post reply on HN